Do You Even Watch The Games?: A Clearinghouse For All [Advanced] Statistics

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You have to register
before you can post. To do so, click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please do not post any copyrighted images or content without permission from the owner of those images or content. If you are unsure if an image or content is copyright protected, do not post it. When posting images from Google's image search, be sure to utilize the ability to filter by Usage Rights. This is located under Tools > Usage Rights. Any materials that infringe on any owner's Intellectual Property rights will be promptly removed.

I haven't had a chance to spend as much time reading through this, but this is a topic that has been trending throughout the stats community. It is a bit intensive so if you are new to AS, it may be a bit confusing.

Although they do now include Advanced Stats, NHL.com has recently redone their entire stats system. Lot of different new ways to look at data. There are also check boxes where you can select players and it will give you a chart.

For instance, I just ran the Rangers players from 12/13 to 14/15 for the post season. There you can see the stats the guys have put up over that range by selecting Aggregate Results.

Brassard leads the team with 40 points in 54 playoff games. Stepan is 2nd with 32 and McDonagh is 3rd with 30.

If you don't aggregate results, it gives you each year on a different line.

There are still a ton of holes that could easily be filled, but it's a step in the right direction as far as stats is concerned.

Edit: Oh shit, there's a "more Filters" button that gives you a ton more options. For instance, you can select Time on Ice played and then set it for less than 10 minutes (just an example). Now you're only looking at players who average less than 10 minutes per game. You can set all sorts of filters and as many as you want. I'm not getting shit done today.

Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. George Carlin

Thanks for the update, as I forgot to post it. This is phase 2 of 3. The first was done in January and the next one will take place in a few months I believe. I believe more stuff from SAP, but I'll try and find the full time line.

Hidden Content“Practice isn't the thing you do once you're good. It's the thing you do that makes you good.”- Malcolm Gladwell

I'm new around here but I'm more of a "watch the game" type of guy. Any stat that tells me Dan Boyle is a good hockey player is pretty much a useless stat to me. So I will probably be a baby and throw a bunch of fits about advanced stats because, as I said, I find them mostly pointless. But all in good fun.

Stats don't tell if anyone is a good hockey player. Big goal totals mean a guy can score. Big assist totals mean a guy can pass. Good analytics could be good fortune for a bad player. Looking at any one stat (and even more so, any one stat in one game) will never tell you the complete story.

Stats don't tell if anyone is a good hockey player. Big goal totals mean a guy can score. Big assist totals mean a guy can pass. Good analytics could be good fortune for a bad player. Looking at any one stat (and even more so, any one stat in one game) will never tell you the complete story.

Seeing this tweet this morning made me think of your post

@NYP_Brooksie: The folly of single-game Corsi: By that measure, Zuccarello was Rangers' worst player last night v. Blues.

Not shocked. We've been talking about it for a while now -- the Rangers are relying, almost entirely, on god-level goaltending and opportunistic scoring to get to where they are. Their PDO has predicted regression for weeks, and when you consider the makeup of the roster, it's not strange to see them in said "Bad, Lucky" grouping.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure much of anything can be done to remedy it any time soon. Fixing a problem of this magnitude takes a while because it means moving out a lot of bad deals -- namely Staal, Girardi, Yandle and maybe even some of the forward group. Hayes? Stepan?

I'm still somewhat optimism they can pull off a deal or two this year to mask the stink enough to make a run of it, but another failed post season and I'm gonna be in heavy favor of significant overhaul this summer. Buchnevich, Skjei and probably Hellberg or Shestyorkin all in out of camp, and maybe long looks given to guys like Gropp, Bodie, Hrivik, Nejezchleb, and Graves.

An influx of young, fresh legs with an emphasis on stronger possession numbers/play.

They can make it work in the regular season. Clearly. They have superior goaltending on most nights (against mostly inferior teams), and despite being in the red of nearly every advanced statistical category, it yields them a positive results more often than not. They’re on pace for a 112-point season, by my math (could be wrong).

But—and this is a big but—this won’t sustain. Just as their high PDO won’t sustain. When you account of the gruel of the playoffs, where the quality of competition doesn’t just increase initially, but in succession game-to-game (you are playing Price or Holtby or Bishop at least four times trying to get past them), something has to be done to improve these figures before those playoffs start, or it’s gonna be another disappointing Spring for a team clinging to the ledge of a closing window.

23. Some numbers on the Rangers from Sportlogiq, the analytics company we deal with: the average NHL team gives up slightly less than one-quarter of the scoring chances it allows on the rush. Last Saturday night, the Flames drove that number up to 31 per cent.

That can happen against Calgary, which works to enter your zone with possession. What has to concern New York even more is that Edmonton scored six times (not counting the empty-netter) despite only 20 per cent of its chances coming off the rush.

You look back at the video and see how the Rangers are having trouble with both dump-ins and carry-ins. That’s a rough combination.

Video in link below…

25. Another example: The chart below is the league average of shots per zone.

Below is New York’s breakdown.

When Alain Vigneault said the goalies were bailing them out, he was right. Opponents are getting in tight. Still think the Rangers are too good not to figure it out.

To me, that looks like the Rangers are about league average when it comes to where shots are coming from.

We're talking about less than 1 shot per game in the slot. The Rangers give up 1.7% more than the average team from the slot. If the Rangers give up 35 shots a night, that's .595 shots per game. Not exactly indicative of anything.